SMT. MOLYKUTTY MATHEW : MEMBER
This is a complaint filed by the complainant U/s 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 for an order directing the opposite parties to return the amount of Rs.90000/- with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of payment along with compensation and cost of the proceedings to the complainant for the deficiency of service on their part.
The case of the complainant in brief
The complainant and other members of Udaya Jyothi Swayam Sahaya Sangam arrange a tour programme on December 2017. Then one of the representative of the sangam one Mr. Ratheesh M approached the OP to chart out a tour for 3 nights and 2 days at Mysore. Then the OPs arranged 49 seats bus to carry 45 passengers for a total amount of Rs. 90,000/-. The amount was calculated on the basis of Rs.2000/- per head. On 05/12/2017 the representative of the sangam paid Rs.20,000/- as advance amount to OP and the balance amount will be paid at the time of tour for Rs.70,000/-. At the time of booking, the tour package the OP assured that all comfortable facilities are available to the passengers, ie, food, water, hotel accommodation and guide facilities to the passengers in a spacious bathroom, room attached hotel and also provide vegetable and non-vegetable food to the passengers etc. The complainant and other passengers started the journey on 23/12/2017 at 11 PM but the OP did not provide the amenities comfort as agreed. More over the complainant states that he has paid the balance amount of Rs.70000/- to the OP’s Guide one Mr.Satheesh (driver) on 23/12/2017, just before starting of the tour as per the term agreed at the time of booking the tour programme but the OP’s did not issue the receipt to the complainant. The OP states that in the ordinary course of tour they did not give receipt from the bus and they can collect receipt from OP’s office after the tour programme. The complainant and other passengers reached the starting point of tour programme the bus arranged by the OP was not a luxury and comfortable one, not sufficient leg space also. The complainant and other passengers suffered the comfortless act of OP’s service. Then the complainant approached for the receipt soon after the tour programme the OP insulted the complainant and not issued the receipt also. Then the complainant issued a lawyer notice to OP. The OP send a reply contending the false statements. Alleging the above said acts the complainant caused much mental agony and financial loss. So there is deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs. Hence the complaint.
After receiving notice the OPs entered appearance before the commission and filed their written version contending that there is no deficiency of service or unfair trade practice on the part of them as alleged in the complaint. The OPs are conducting tours and travels on a package basis in the name “Real 3G tours & travels”. They contended that in addition to 45 persons, 9 children in the age group of 12 & 18 were accompanied their parents to tour violating the terms agreed between them. Then the complainant states that the Sangam would pay an additional amount of Rs.18,000/- to the OP. Then the OP agreed to adjust 54 passengers in the 49 seated bus. The OP arranged a comfortable journey and accommodation for all the 54 passengers. When the OP demanded the balance amount of tour programme, the complainant gave an assurance to OP that the balance amount of Rs.88000/- would be paid soon. But after issuing lawyer notice the OP filed a suit for money against the complainant before the Munsiff court Kannur for contending an amount of Rs.88000/- with future interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of suit. So there is no deficiency of service or unfair trade practice on the part of OPs and the complaint may be dismissed.
On the basis of the rival contention of both sides the following issues were framed for considerations.
- Whether there is any deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for any relief?
- Relief and cost?
The evidence consists of the oral testimony of Pw1 and Ext.A1 to A8 were marked on the part of complainant. The OPs not adduced any oral or documentary evidence.
Issue 1 to 3 taken together
The complainant submitted his chief affidavit in lieu of his chief examination to the tune of the pleadings in the complainant and denying the contentions in the version. According to the complainant the Ext.A1 dated 05/12/2017 clearly shows that the complainant’s representative paid Rs.20,000/- as advance payment for the tour programme. In Ext.A3 the complainant send a registered lawyer notice to OP dated 28/12/2017regarding that the bus arranged by the OP was not a luxury and comfortable one and not sufficient leg space also. More over the OP did not provide the amenities as agreed. In Ext.A4 dated 19/01/2018 the reply notice issued by OP’s counsel to complainant’s counsel demanding the balance amount of Rs.70000/- for the tour programme along with Rs.18,000/- as additional charge incurred by the OP in the tour expenses. In order to obtain the said amount the OP filed a money suit before the Hon’ble Munsiff Court Kannur as OS No.397/2018. As per Ext.A7 & Ext.A8 the decree and judgment produced by the complainant show that suit for money is dismissed without cost. But in this case the OP’s side except the version no evidence and documents produced before the commission to substantiate their contention. From the forgoing discussions and findings we the commission hold that the tour programme conducted by OPs the complainant and other passengers caused much mental agony and discomfort to food and other accommodation facilities. So there is deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs. Hence the issue No.1 found infavour of the complainant.
Regarding the issue No.2 as discussed above the complainant has produced Ext.A1 document before the commission to show the advance payment. No other documents produced before the commission to substantiate that complainant has paid the balance amount to OP. But as per Ext.A3 document it is clear that the tour conducted by OP the complainant and other passengers suffered much mental agony and other difficulties regarding food, accommodation facilities etc. So the complainant is entitled to get Rs.20000/- towards compensation for mental agony from OPs with 9% interest per annum from the date of order till realization along with Rs.5000/- as litigation cost.
In the result the complaint is allowed in part directing the OPs jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.20000/- as compensation for mental agony of the complainant with 9% interest per annum from the date of order till realization along with Rs.5000/- as litigation cost within 30 days of receipt of this order. Failing which, the complainant is at liberty to execute the order as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act 2019.
Exhibits for complainant
A1 - Bill dated 05/12/2017
A2 - Photos
A3 - Lawyer notice
A4 - Reply notice
A5 - Copy of minutes
A6 - Copy of minutes
A7 - Certified copy of Decree
A8 - Certified copy of Judgment
Sd/ Sd/ Sd/
PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER
Ravi Susha Molykutty Mathew Sajeesh K.P
(mnp)
/Forward by order/
Assistant Registrar
